Delete Parallels VM

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already mark the tool as destructive, so the bar is lower, but the description adds meaningful context: deletion is permanent, includes all associated disk images, and affects host storage. It also explains the confirm parameter's safety role, which helps the agent understand the operation's consequences.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact: a clear one-sentence behavioral summary followed by a two-item parameter list. Every sentence adds necessary information, and the most important fact (permanent deletion) is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive VM operation, the description covers the core action, the disk-image impact, and the confirmation requirement. It does not address whether the VM must be in a particular state before deletion, but the output schema and destructive annotations cover some of the surrounding context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description explicitly documents both parameters: vm accepts a name or UUID, and confirm must be set to true to prevent accidental deletion. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of detail and adds practical guidance beyond the raw property definitions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb ('delete') and resource ('VM'), and adds scope by saying the action permanently removes the VM and all associated disk images from host storage. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like snapshot_delete and vm_stop.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when a snapshot should be deleted instead, or whether the VM must be powered off first. The only safety instruction is about the confirm parameter, which is not usage differentiation.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.